From what I heard, the dog was chained and in his own fenced backyard and the child got in somehow.

Just wondering, if the child was on the dogs property, why should he be PTS? I know my boy Nitro isn't great with kids (I don't know that for a fact at all, but he had two bad reactions with kids but also a fine one just yesterday) and if someone came into my yard, I don't know how he'd react.

I realize dogs are being put down all the time who are innocent but it's unfair for Mickey either way.

From what I heard, the dog was chained and in his own fenced backyard and the child got in somehow.

Just wondering, if the child was on the dogs property, why should he be PTS? I know my boy Nitro isn't great with kids (I don't know that for a fact at all, but he had two bad reactions with kids but also a fine one just yesterday) and if someone came into my yard, I don't know how he'd react.

I realize dogs are being put down all the time who are innocent but it's unfair for Mickey either way.

Also wasn't fair to the child who about got his face ripped off either.

From what I heard, the dog was chained and in his own fenced backyard and the child got in somehow.

Just wondering, if the child was on the dogs property, why should he be PTS? I know my boy Nitro isn't great with kids (I don't know that for a fact at all, but he had two bad reactions with kids but also a fine one just yesterday) and if someone came into my yard, I don't know how he'd react.

I realize dogs are being put down all the time who are innocent but it's unfair for Mickey either way.

I think because not liking kids and attacking kids are very different. Gwen dislikes kids. She would not inflict damage (at least not to that extent). If a dog does that much damage to a child for it "wandering into the property" or "taking a bone", the dog is not safe.

Snapping is one thing. That dog did a lot more. If Gwen did that, she would be PTS. I would not feel safe. And I don't have the experience or resources to handle a dog that reacted that way.

From what I heard, the dog was chained and in his own fenced backyard and the child got in somehow.

Just wondering, if the child was on the dogs property, why should he be PTS? I know my boy Nitro isn't great with kids (I don't know that for a fact at all, but he had two bad reactions with kids but also a fine one just yesterday) and if someone came into my yard, I don't know how he'd react.

I realize dogs are being put down all the time who are innocent but it's unfair for Mickey either way.

A dog that holds and shakes is a liability. That's how dogs bite when they're trying to kill something or are serious about causing damage.

Just on the principle of the thing, I don't agree with the city mandating the dog be killed if he bites on his own property--IMO property owners shouldn't be liable for whatever happens to tresspassers. But if the owners are unhappy with the dog and feel it is dangerous and wish to prioritize wandering childrens' safety over their dog's, good for them.

A dog that holds and shakes is a liability. That's how dogs bite when they're trying to kill something or are serious about causing damage.

Just on the principle of the thing, I don't agree with the city mandating the dog be killed if he bites on his own property--IMO property owners shouldn't be liable for whatever happens to tresspassers. But if the owners are unhappy with the dog and feel it is dangerous and wish to prioritize wandering childrens' safety over their dog's, good for them.

This^^

Also, I did not realize in my initial post that this was a dog on a neighbouring property and secured on said property.

I guess that's what I get for reading things before I reach my coffee quota.

The kid did take the dogs property, on the dogs property. There was also a picture of him with another child and perfectly fine and seeming relaxed. The dog probably just reacted badly to the situation but I don't think he should be pts.

I just feel like the case is different because the child was on their dogs property. If it was anywhere else, I'd have a totally different opinion.